LinuxToday Astroturfed By Its Own Staff?

Not sure if this is funny or just interesting, but apparently Kevin Reichard, the "Executive Editor of the Linux/Open Source & Internet Technology Channels at internet.com" has been accused of astroturfing LinuxToday. Astroturfing is pretending to be a bunch of people to fake grassroots support, and LinuxToday is one of the larger Linux news sites. And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.

Comments

What kind of site does Slashdot want to be?

[Sanity]

If the editors of /. want it to be a serious news site, then the need to include the words "and obviously, this is a rumor" should disqualify any article immediately. Of course, I am sure in most cases it would, but in this case, the site on the receiving end happens to be a competitor.

I know that it is getting fashionable to criticise slashdot these days, and most of the time, my answer is "if you don't like it, don't visit the site", however I think that this definitely steps over the line.

So are we to see a relaxation of any editorial standards whenever the opportunity arises to take a swipe at a competitive news site?

--

Another interesting, um, internet.com'ism

[rwuest]

First, Let me say that I have an agenda: I've had a war on, since 1998, with the authors of a crappy little program for Linux called linuxcad. This is a several hundred dollar (yes it _does_ cost more than $99 to get all the stuff, trust me) piece of junk that, in addition to not being worth anything like the price (can you say "rip-off"), they are constant newsgroup spammers.

Now it amazes me that, for as long as I can remember visiting linuxapps, this program has been in the #6 "Most popular today" position. I notice that kind of thing. Now a quick search around and you'll only find this program at one other site, SAL, which may not know any better. I've written to linuxapps.com suggesting they remove it to keep Linuxers from getting ripped off (I've got a number of emails to back that), but it's still there. It sure is suspicious to me.

Ok, maybe the list isn't updated, but then again, I have seen it change. So it seems to me, that they're playing a similar game here (the game of deception) to make you think lcad is a popular program, probably for pay from the lcad authors (I emphasize probably), and get you ripped-off, too.

Journalism

[Uruk]

And obviously this is a rumor. Pretty interesting to read some of the stuff that was said.

And that's why nobody should bitch about what slashdot does and what slashdot says. Ever see anything in the Wall Street Journal followed by "and this is obviously a rumor"...

This is not a professional journalism site. This is a rumour mill, a flame room, and all kinds of other things. So if I see another post saying "slashdot really sucks because they don't give equal time to X" I'm going to start spinning, and spinning, and I'm not going to stop, until THERES BLOOD ALL OVER THE WALLS.

It's not a rumor. It's a news story.

[dinotrac]

I don't know how many sources Joe had, but I do know that he researched this story. He contacted me for some of my opinions on LT, but, so far as I can tell, the only contribution I made (assuming others didn't make it as well) was to notice that LT's talkback policy changed a couple of months ago, eliminating language about frowning on deceptive practices.

I seriously hope that these charges are not true. I have spent a lot of time there, and count some of its former staffers (damned dot.com bust) among my friends.

I have to admit, slow and dim-witted as I am, even I had noticed a couple of funny things.

Here are a couple of posts that really stuck in my head:

http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001- 02 -21-001-20-OP-BZ-CY-0027
(George Tirebiter telling ac he had posted his response to another article)

The interesting thing here is that Tirebiter's response doesn't seem remotely
right for an LT reader. Why?
1. Because it crosses articles
2. Because Tirebiter must have some reason to assume that ac didn't post
the link in response to two different articles - something he couldn't know
without being an insider
3. If one hadn't just read the ac post containing the link, searching for
it would have been all but impossible with the broken LT search engine.
Searching for AC chokes. The only way to make is show up (at least back when
I tried it) was to search for "1999". Not exactly intuitive.

http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001- 03 -07-001-21-OP-DT-RH-0019
(Clark Addison telling me that I must not be an attentive LT reader or I
would have noticed the InstallShield banner adds)

1. Just odd to have a reader drawing my attention to the banner ads.
2. This is the guy's third post and second on this article. His first post
was three days earlier.
3. Funny -- there is a Tirebiter response on this, too.

Clark Addison had two more posts (3/13 and 14) then disappears into the ether.

Two weird posts don't mean anything.
Still...

Dean Pannell
(a.k.a. dinotrac)

Linux Today Astroturfed by Own Staff? (Joe Barr)

[heliocentric]

Contributed by Anonymous on Wednesday, July 18 @ 19:39:00 PDT
Printer Friendly Page
[Miscellaneous] An anonymous source has provided detailed evidence showing that the popular Linux news portal LinuxToday.com has been astroturfed by its own staff for almost as long as it has been owned by internet.com. In particular, the source has identified Kevin Reichard, Executive Editor of the Linux/Open Source & Internet Technology Channels at internet.com, as having allegedly posted these messages under a number of aliases on the site.

According to the source, others were involved in the astroturfing as well, though not to the same degree as Reichard. The source expressed hope that they will step forward and out themselves of their own accord.

"Astroturfing" refers to a method used to create the illusion of grassroots support. The term came into popularity following the LA Times revelation in 1998 of a Microsoft PR plan which would pay individuals to write letters, opinion pieces, or comments in online forums supporting Microsoft in their protracted antitrust battle.

Based on the evidence supplied by the source, Reichard has been posting talkbacks under a number of fictitious names since late 1999. Reichard has allegedly used the aliases of "George Tirebiter", "Tom Dooley", and "Will Smith" among others. These ersatz talkbacks reveal a very clear pattern of demeaning the competition while cheerleading for those associated with internet.com. The posts have targeted the sites and/or staff from sites such as LinuxWorld.com, Newsforge, Slashdot, Linux.com, ZD Net, Infoworld, Linux Journal, and The Register.

The talkbacks posted under these names accused others of trolling for page views and claiming that they were something less than honest and candid. About O'Reilly, "George Tirebiter" said, "Just some FUD spread by a company with a vested interest -- and they don't tell you their interest."

A search of LinuxToday talkbacks done today returns eight instances of the use of the perjorative term "Newsforger" when referring to the competitive site, Newsforge.com, which is a site owned by VA Linux. Seven of those eight instances are from talkbacks posted by the aliases "George Tirebiter", "Will Smith", and "Tom Dooley". The eighth is a post by Grant Gross, editor at the Newsforge site. Gross was responding to a talkback posted by the alias "Tom Dooley" which attacked Newsforge, saying that they were "blatantly and shamelessly trolling for page views. At least when LToday talks to RMS it's over something important, not something stupid like this."

These alias "personalities" also went after leaders of the open source and free software communities. People like Eric Raymond, Richard Stallman, and Alan Cox. "George Tirebiter", in particular, attacked the GPL, Linux geeks, Red Hat, VA Linux, Sun, and IBM.

The rollcall of the "Tirebiter" targets reads like a Microsoft "enemies list." In one talkback "Tirebiter" defends Microsoft's attacks on the GPL by asking "Why are we villifying Microsoft for raising valid concerns that others have raised?". "George Tirebiter" said about Alan Cox, "I woulda thought better of Alan. But then again, he's the only one not to release his opinion to the public, preferring to retain ownership on a closed-source Red Hat site."

In one rant, "George Tirebiter" lashes out at Eric S. Raymond's piece called "Beware the Microsoft shell game." "Tirebiter" posted a message saying "Y'all are a hoot. I want some of the wacky tobaccy y'all are smoking, because it certainly does alter your senses. You don't even see that stunts like this allow ESR to claim a victory no matter what happens: should someone from MS give a speech that doesn't mention open source, he'll claim victory." In the same post, the alias conludes by telling LinuxToday readers to "Wake up. You're being manipulated, and y'all don't even know it."

thats awefull

[Billly Gates]

Boy, its a good thing Microsoft would never do anything like this to make NT look more popular.

Can this all just stop now?

[update()]

I haven't been able to read the Slashdotted page, just what has been reposted here. It sounds like the sort of detective work you see on the troll sites, where loons argue over the identity of other anonymous loons as though national security is at stake.

Meanwhile, at kuro5hin, there's a dispute going as to whether the author of a piece saying Linux tech support is going to be difficult is a Microsoft employee. A few day ago, Linux Today posters on various Mono-related articles were insisting, apparently in all seriousness, that Miguel de Icaza is a Microsoft mole, and speculating that Richard Stallman is, as well. Almost every discussion there involves accusations of astroturfing, with Joe Barr, who seems to be involved here, leading the pack.

Hopefully this sort of accusation is going to go out of fashion soon. Anyone with a little experience in the adult world should have learned why it's considered bad form to wildly throw unsupported, undisprovable accusations at anyone you dislike. ("You're complaining that my cattle ate your corn? Well, I think you're a WITCH!") To my mind, shouting "Astroturf!" is like stamping "obnoxious 14 year old" on your forehead* and just gives the impression you're too boneheaded to accept the possibility that anyone might genuinely disagree with you -- let alone that you might be wrong.

Anyway, who cares? Posters say what they say and it doesn't matter who might be paying them. And does it really matter if witless attacks against Eric Raymond by "George Tirebiter" are really by an editor? How is that even "astroturfing" at all?

* As do "BWAHAHAHAHAHA!" and "Bzzzt! Wrong!" You can almost smell the Clearasil when you read stuff like that.

Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.

It can't be!

[President of The US]

Someone faking their identity on an internet message board? I can't believe it! Is nothing sacred?! You don't know who your reading anymore.

Ahh, screw it, I don't want to deal with this. I'm enjoying this AOL chat room much more -- I think I'll ask Sexygrrl69 what she thinks about those jerks at LinuxToday.
-----------------------